As of right now, do you rate Mayweather above the following fighters:

I'd personally put all of them ahead of him. But arguments can be made that he's ahead of RJJ and ODH.

 

You seriously think you;re a smart **** dont you? Who did hamsho beat thats better than briscoe, lol. Briscoe virtually lost to every important fighter he ever faced, well except for the hometown decision he got against eddie mustafa muhammad. Why can't bobby cycz, alan minter and bobby watts beat briscoe, i mean he lost to bums in his own ****ing prime. By the way, i'm postive alan minter usually ranks above your hero briscoe u stupid ****.

When hearns and benitez fought, it was clear who the smaller fighter was, so i dont know why you're laughing you dumb ****.

Tell me john thomas, the mr. know it all. What was bennie's actual record against ranked opponents? 3-13 lol. He beat a green rondon, a gift against a green eddie, and tony mundine. You're going to tell me thats better than alan minter's resume? Boy you must be joking. Minter is a man that beat antuofermo twice and has wins over 6-7 other contenders, bobby cycz, a man that would go on to become a decent light heavyweight beltholder. Hell bennie briscoe lost to luis rodriguez and a past his prime griffith, who is to say benitez wouldnt box his ears off.

Minter, antufermo and hamsho all rank above briscoe. Hold on the original arguement was to prove hagler is a top 20 p4per, i believe thats the reason i was wasting my time with you, you havent proven otherwise that he isnt.

 

Seems sad that people forget just how great Hagler was. It might not be fashionable to rule a division now but Hagler was one of the greatest MW's of all time, and that's a division steeped in history.

 

P4P - I think he'd beat Hagler, like Leonard did. I also think he'd beat De La Hoya. Hearns would KO him in my opinion.

 

I don't do p4p match ups. It's too much to contemplate. And besides Leonard himself wouldn't take on a prime Hagler...

DLH was older and rustier and many think he deserved at least a draw against Floyd. They both started at the same weight so there's no need for p4p thinking there.

I agree on Hearns.

 

To begin...


Here's a list of some of the contenders that Briscoe defeated:

Eugene Hart (draw, KO 1)
George Benton
Jimmy Lester
Vicente Rondon (split two fights)
Emile Griffith
Tony Chiaverini
Art Hernandez
Percy Manning
Rafael Gutirerrez
Plus the draw against Monzon that really should have been a win.

Mustapha Hamsho's record against contenders

A green Bobby Czyz
Curtis Parker (got a gift in the first fight)
Alan Minter (past his prime, one fight away from retirement, and Hamsho still might have lost the decision.)
Wilfred Benitez (probably his best win, but you could make a case that Benitez was hardly the same fighter here as he was, even against Hearns.)
Wlifred Scyphion (green, and not all that great to begin with)
Bobby Watts (good win)

So, which record do you prefer? :good

You can spin it both ways, and I just have.

In truth, I think Hamsho and Briscoe were both legit, dangerous contenders who had the misfortune of competing in eras where the champions were dominant. Now, you can argue that point...or, you can act like a six year old, and call me names...

Choice is yours.

 

please show me the fight between monzon and briscoe from 1966, i doubt it exists on tape. By the way, i dont recall brsicoe ever beating griffith. Hamsho beat those guys when they were in the top 10, unlike briscoe. Cycyz was 20-0 when hamsho beat him, which is a much better record than most of those guys that brisoce beat.

 

...

 

Sure it has to be factored in, but I think its more an issue in some cases than in others. Did you see anything in the performances of Nelson or Chavez to suggest that if the fights had occured say at 130 and 140 respectively that they could have done something different though? They both got severely outclassed and issues like strength, power etc had nothig to do with it. They couldn't land on him, and I don't see why for example someone like Chavez would have landed anything at a lower weight class either where Whitaker himself was sharper. Let's not forget for example that Whitaker himself was a novice at welterweight when he fought Chavez there. He basically moved from lightweight to welter in a year whereas Chavez had been campaining a 140 for years and having quite a few fights as a welter (though no real important ones admittedly). Did Whitaker look bigger in the ring to Chavez? I don't think so.

As for DLH-Mayweather, DLH had one decent performance at 154 in years, against Mayorga. The DLH that Floyd fought would have been soundly outboxed imo by the one that faced Vargas for example and even would have lost to the one that faced Mosley the second time. Not saying that Oscar wasn't still good, obviously he was, but he was markedly slower imo.

 

i have to agree with him here, he has a point. they are the same size and weight.

 

Sure it's good to be lineal, but it isn't the sole measure of a fighter's worth. Miguel Cotto for instance, isn't a lineal welterweight. Carlos Baldomir is. No prizes for guessing who the better welterweight is.

A past prime Chavez who was of course, still regarded the best fighter in the world at the time. The likes of Castillo, Corrales and Hatton on their best day were not as good as that Chavez. A past prime DLH wasn't better than that Chavez either. Not saying DLH was shot, he was still an excellent fighter, but come now, he had only beaten Mayorga in the past three years and was coming off a year lay off.

I'm not so sure. Chavez, unlike Hatton has more dimensions to his game. For instance he has defense, Hatton doesnt. He has good punch selection and variation, Hatton doesn't. He applies educated pressure, Hatton doesn't. He has a nice lead right (with which he was effective, even against Whitaker), Hatton doesn't. The lead right is a good punch to use against Mayweather. And let's not compare left body rips either. What's more Chavez is a smarter fighter. You'd never see Chavez be so stupid as to hold with his best hand, as Hatton did against Mayweather, and rely on his pathetic right to score with (what was Hatton thinking?).

I'd say Mayweather loses much the same way Benitez lost to Leonard.

Agree it would be close.

Probably not, but he does (did) lose to an 135 pound Castillo imo.

Don't forget that Hagler was past his prime though. And in any case, imo he eeked it out by a point. But for sure, arguably he lost. How would a past prime Mayweather do against a lighter Leonard level fighter? Well, that's to be seen. I'd take Hearns at 160 over Corrales at his best weight (130). Hearns was a superior fighter, even outside his best weight (which was 147 imo).

Couldn't say accurately. I wont list all the champs he beat though, you can check boxrec for that. IMO it trumps the level of comp Floyd has fought.

I've watched it quite a few times now. There are a few rounds I can see Floyd getting the nod on, and so I have no problem with you saying Floyd won. I have tried to pay close attention to the punches landed. I didn't see a dominant display by Floyd. I saw Floyd landing many punches on Oscar's gloves which got credited as punches landed. Same thing happened in the Hopkins-Wright fight. Wright was blocking a lot with his gloves. Had it a draw.

I can't see how you can say this with much certainty. Quartey was a monster welterweight. He could very well beat Floyd in virtue of how physically strong he is combined with his decent speed and good jab. Mosley outgunned a prime DLH and did so in better fashion than Floyd did to an old rusty DLH. Floyd has better precision punching and defense, but that's about it. Mosley was quicker at welter for mine, stronger and hit harder as well.

Sure I can see it happening, but let's be honest here, Quartey isn't going to be getting hit with every punch like Hatton was, and Quartey has much better strength and power than Hatton as a welter. If Floyd tries to counter, he better be careful he doesn't run into Quartey's retaliating shots.

Anyone with Tito's punch needs to be respected. He can turn the fight with one well placed hook. He is pretty predictable, but he has great stamina and great power, and his height and reach will serve him well against Floyd as well. Floyd gets in range at his own peril.

An ethiopian DLH knocks Corrales out, he's just too fast for him. He's too fast for Castillo as well, and hits too hard. He'd either knock him out or win an 8-4 type decision. Judah would get koed mid fight after rocking DLH (rocking people is Judah's claim to fame) and a 24 year old DLH would move around the ring and outspeed and outfinesse a 34 year old DLH 8-4.

 

ya sure heres my welterweight list

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Sugar Ray Leonard
3. Emile Griffith
4. Thomas Hearns
5. Joe Napoles
6. Joe Walcott
7. Kid Gavilan
8. Luiz Rodriguez
9. Henry Armstrong- too small, rate much higher at 135lb and 140lb
10. Oscar De La Hoya

 

delahoya is far too fast and skilled for corrales and castillo. the peak 135lb oscar who destroyed ruelas, paez, molina, knocks corrales and castillo out. oscar had some of the finest boxing skills we have ever seen

 

de la hoya and rodriguez above curry? thats interesting.

 

I'm not talking about different result vs Whitaker, I'm talking about them having success at those weights in general, against other opposition. It's far from being carved in stone, too many unsuccessful examples, like I said.